Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34889753›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2021

Prediction Algorithms for Blood Pressure Based on Pulse Wave Velocity Using Health Checkup Data in Healthy Korean Men: Algorithm Development and Validation.

Dohyun Park, Soo Jin Cho, Kyunga Kim, Hyunki Woo, Jee Eun Kim, Jin-Young Lee, Janghyun Koh, JeanHyoung Lee, Jong Soo Choi, Dong Kyung Chang and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Dohyun Park *Department of Digital Health, Samsung Advanced Institute of Health Sciences and Technology, Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9452-212X
Soo Jin Cho *Center for Health Promotion, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4361-4988
Kyunga Kim *Department of Digital Health, Samsung Advanced Institute of Health Sciences and Technology, Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0865-2236
Hyunki WooData Science Team, Evidnet Inc, Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4868-6270
Jee Eun KimCenter for Health Promotion, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7107-0821
Jin-Young LeeCenter for Health Promotion, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7420-3287
Janghyun KohCenter for Health Promotion, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1300-2553
JeanHyoung LeeDigital Innovation Center, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1011-5368
Jong Soo ChoiDigital Innovation Center, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3108-406X
Dong Kyung ChangDepartment of Digital Health, Samsung Advanced Institute of Health Sciences and Technology, Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8925-4629
Yoon-Ho ChoiCenter for Health Promotion, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5324-2263
Ji In ChungCenter for Health Promotion, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0894-3575
Won Chul ChaDepartment of Digital Health, Samsung Advanced Institute of Health Sciences and Technology, Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2778-2992
Ok Soon JeongDigital Innovation Center, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6172-6329
Se Yong JekalDigital Innovation Center, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0921-6380
Mira KangDepartment of Digital Health, Samsung Advanced Institute of Health Sciences and Technology, Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7842-0035
Samsung Medical Center · KRSamsung (South Korea) · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPulse transit time and pulse wave velocity (PWV) are related to blood pressure (BP), and there were continuous attempts to use these to predict BP through wearable devices. However, previous studies were conducted on a small scale and could not confirm the relative importance of each variable in predicting BP.

objectiveThis study aims to predict systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure based on PWV and to evaluate the relative importance of each clinical variable used in BP prediction models.

methodsThis study was conducted on 1362 healthy men older than 18 years who visited the Samsung Medical Center. The systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure were estimated using the multiple linear regression method. Models were divided into two groups based on age: younger than 60 years and 60 years or older; 200 seeds were repeated in consideration of partition bias. Mean of error, absolute error, and root mean square error were used as performance metrics.

resultsThe model divided into two age groups (younger than 60 years and 60 years and older) performed better than the model without division. The performance difference between the model using only three variables (PWV, BMI, age) and the model using 17 variables was not significant. Our final model using PWV, BMI, and age met the criteria presented by the American Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation. The prediction errors were within the range of about 9 to 12 mmHg that can occur with a gold standard mercury sphygmomanometer.

conclusionsDividing age based on the age of 60 years showed better BP prediction performance, and it could show good performance even if only PWV, BMI, and age variables were included. Our final model with the minimal number of variables (PWB, BMI, age) would be efficient and feasible for predicting BP.

Indexed as

algorithmsblood pressuremedical informaticsprediction modelpulse transit timepulse wave velocitywearable devices

Identifiers

PMID34889753
PMCPMC8701706
OpenAlexW4200171643

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.